Long read on the Abu Ghraib prison (and who's at fault)

[RCinator]

http://www.msnbc.msn.com/id/4989422/site/newsweek/

"Gonzales also argued that dropping Geneva would allow the president to "preserve his flexibility" in the war on terror. His reasoning? That U.S. officials might otherwise be subject to war-crimes prosecutions under the Geneva Conventions. "



Greeeeaaat.....

[Ralph Wiggum]

A little equal time from the vast right-wing conspiracy.

http://www.opinionjournal.com/editorial/feature.html?id=110005089

[Colonel Ingus Profile]

Thanks for the counterpoint Ralph.

Let me first start by saying I don't believe this of RCinator so please don't be offended. My saying what I am saying is in no way a reflection upon you or your posting the link you did.

There is a dangerous game that politicians and people with strong political beliefs play and that is blowing situations so out of hand to gain political and electoral advantage that the truth, the damage they do, and the people they hurt, do not matter. EVERYONE does this in political arena EVERYWHERE!

So you have people questioning and reporting in ways that not only damages individuals and organizations, but ALL Americans.

You would think the fact that numerous publications publishing pictures from a Hungarian porn site showing Americans raping Iraqi women would did enough damage to our reputation in the middle east and among Arabs. I can honestly say that I truly believe a significant majority of them would not care nor believe that the pictures that Arab Media, British media, and American media showed was movie clips from paid actors.

No we have to go out of our way in a well reported series of events to make "the other party" (doesn't matter which side is in power at the time) look their worst. Never mind the damage that is done to our society, our reputation worldwide, and the danger in which it places our citizens abroad.

Did some do wrong? I don't think any of us doubt this. Was this some part of a governmentally approved program? If you believe that then you need serious help. Should the poeple who did this be punished? yes! Should we turn this into a witch hunt that destroys whatever we have accomplished? NO!

Hell I personally believe Bill Clinton lying under oath was a more flagrant problem than this and I voted for him!

The whole problem I am attempting to address is that no one says (on both sides of the political aisle again) Lets find the truth, Lets punish the wrong doer's, Or my personal favorite is that NONE OF THEM say lets do whats best for the people (any people, doesn't have to be Americans).

The vindictiveness and the diatribes serve no useful goal but to inflame an already tenuous situation for nothing more than political gain. There is no concern about the general welfare of the country, let alone the world, as it is secondary to appearance.

Where is one guy? one politician? one concerned individual or media organization? that says lets address this problem, find out the truth, and punish the wrongdoers?

There isn't one. But there a ton of people who see political advantage to be gained by this and nothing will stand in the way of that.

This is Colonel Ingus signing off as one who is disgusted with the media and politicians.

[Ralph Wiggum]

I only point this out because the Geneva Conventions get thrown around a lot as the end-all-be-all of a lot of discussions, and I thought this piece did a good job of actually discussing their application rather than assuming they applied to every situation and then throwing a fit when they weren't adhered to.

I think it is a valid point to note that they don't apply to every prisoner situation. More importantly for an honest discussion of the Abu Ghraib situation is to note that the provisions people cite to score political points were written to address "prisoners of war," a category that doesn't include the current denizens of Abu Ghraib. Like Ingus, I wholly disapprove of the abuses that occurred there. However, unlike many people who use every opportunity to score political points, like say Ted Kennedy, I don't equate them to the systematic rapes, murders, or even amputations that the Baathists employed.

By the way Ingus, who was the other guy on TS on No. 2 last night when I started ragging on Minnesota? That was aimed at you specifically and I didn't expect the state's booster club to drop the hammer on me.

[RCinator]

I in no way roll this article out as proof positive of anything, so Ingus, no offense is taken whatsoever.

I am, to be completely honest, an almost complete and total centrist. I do not like the way that Bush has handled his presidnecy - that does not mean that I think Gore could have done a better job. Nor does that mean that I think Kerry can do a better job. I will be voting for Kerry _not_ because I think he's any better, but because I think we just need a different slant involved at this point. I gave up any hope in finding a candidate that believes in the things that I do a long time ago. I think the 2 party system is the _real_ problem, not our president - our president is merely the totem for the party that currently holds power. And quite frankly, both paties have some policies I completely disagree with, so . . .

I think you get my point.

[Jim0322 Profile]

Somewhere in Texas a village is missing it's idiot.

[Jim0322 Profile]

Colin Powell for president! He would make a far better president than GW.

Nothing in that article surprises me much. If we are going to permit torture, it should only be done by only a few highly trained individuals against a few highly dangerous terrorists and it should be kept secret. I feel the same way about political assassination. Both could be useful tools in extreme situations. What Bush has done is taken away civil rights from a large number of Americans and foreigners with his policies since 9/11. If it has to be ugly, we should keep the scope of these extreme measures very narrow and there is no way that some dumbass reservist MPs should ever have the authority to treat people that way.

Jim